The SitePoint Forums have moved.

You can now find them here.
This forum is now closed to new posts, but you can browse existing content.
You can find out more information about the move and how to open a new account (if necessary) here.
If you get stuck you can get support by emailing forums@sitepoint.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Do you think humans and other animals are chaotic beings who are regulated by their environment? Some studies in analog artificial intelligence seem to indicate this. There is a guy at the Los Alamos labs working on analog robots that can do much more with less than many digital robots. One robot with only 12 resistors was able to walk around and get itself out of traps, all without the use of digital computers. Since analog robots are much more able to adapt to abnormal situations than digital ones, which is the right path for artificial intelligence research?

I read the whole article in the magazine and it was really good. I'm convinced that analog is the way to go for artificial intelligence. Humans are analog creatures after all. I don't know that we're all that intelligent though...

In order to make 'intelligent' robots, they'll have to undergo some sort of evolution. Whether this happens in a computer or in the real world doesn't really matter, although in a computer things go a lot faster

We Humans didn't exist together with the first life on Earth, billions of years of evolution have passed before the 'intelligent' creatures existed who are called 'Humans'.
I think that the same counts for robots: they won't be nearly perfect with the first few designs.

It would help of course if we could use advanced Neural Networks that work like our brain: analog but effective

I do not believe true life can be created in a machine. You can simulate it quite a bit...but such a thing as emotion cannot likely be used within a machine. I'm very interested in artificial intelligence...however I sure hope people arn't expecting machines as intelligent as humans in the respect that they become curious of things, feeling emotions, or just "wonder" things...computers by themselves are useless without commands...either entered into them or built into them. I don't see a robotic human (like a man in most ways) ever coming into existence.

I don't believe artificial life is possible. But I do believe artificial intelligence is possible and it MAY be possible for it to have emotions. The guy was working on this robot that had two of the networks layered in such a way that he felt it would create self awareness, and with self awareness comes some sort of emotion or feeling.

The current robots are just one of his 'neural networks' connected to a body. This network responds to the environment of the body to react in certain ways. His idea was to have two networks, one connected to the body and the other connected to the first network. The effect is that the second network would respond to the environment of the first network and react in certain ways to that. Essentially it would be aware of what it was doing instead of only reacting to external stimuli, it would react to internal stimuli as well. Emotions are the reaction to internal stimuli, which are influenced by external ones.

Originally posted by LuZeR The current robots are just one of his 'neural networks' connected to a body. This network responds to the environment of the body to react in certain ways. His idea was to have two networks, one connected to the body and the other connected to the first network. The effect is that the second network would respond to the environment of the first network and react in certain ways to that. Essentially it would be aware of what it was doing instead of only reacting to external stimuli, it would react to internal stimuli as well. Emotions are the reaction to internal stimuli, which are influenced by external ones.

Not to sound nerdish, but Martin, could you give me some more links to useful resources on the internet, or magazines or anything else that you find useful, about Neural networks/robotics and anything else that is 'High Science'?

Originally posted by Elledan Come one Chris... These are just the basics...

Not to sound nerdish, but Martin, could you give me some more links to useful resources on the internet, or magazines or anything else that you find useful, about Neural networks/robotics and anything else that is 'High Science'?

I would be very grateful

Actually I don't know of any sites really, just that one article (I think you can order the magazine which has the whole article)

Originally posted by TWTCommish Could you elaborate a bit? What did he do to give it self-awareness?

The thing about emotions is that its produced by chemicals...call me nuts, but I don't think that can be duplicated as easy as some people may think. They're free to try, though.

I think that you probably are a bit biased here because you are christian (I am too, and I dont wnat to change the topic of this discusion or start a flame war). But I think that people that bleive in evolution are more likely to belive that emotions can be recreated and are not something that are magical...you get my drift I hope.

I get your drift...but I don't think I am biased. I believe what I said as PART of being a Christian. Hope that clears things up. If someone proves me wrong and creates it...I'd be shocked, but I'd accept it.

Innocent unless proven otherwise, that's the way to go if you want to avoid being shocked.

Christianity limits the imagination of a Human mind IMHO while science let's you think and do many of the things that your mind can come up with. Just finding the solution for a problem, like faster than light travelling will demand that you use all of your imagination, creativity and knowledge.

I'm sorry if I sounded a little too harsh, but I was actually referring to a (small) group of Christians who use to think that science (all forms of it) is bad. Some go even so far that they'll rather live somewhere in 1200 something...

BUT in response to you saying that christians dont wanna go faster that light...who ever said we didn't. That was never mentioned in the bible and is something was a theory Einstein came up with centuries later.

Okay and back to the Analog VS digital. This is a VERY interesting topic. I couldn't belive that article and that Analog robots could get around. But did you read the other article (http://home-news.excite.ca/news/cp/000830/14/scientists-make-darwinian) here the computer was coming up with its own robots and making them work with its own design with its own inteligence? Now thats amazing. I think it will be a mix of both analog and digital but I dont see how something can be compltely non digital. Plus that is like taking a step back in technology.